text:
Do the moderators here have the ability to delete Buddhism.StackExchange accounts?
I've already requested deletion from the StackExchange staff but it seems to be taking rather a long time. Do the MPTs have that power?

Short answer is yes. Are you sure? There's no undo.

Yes, please. I've made several requests.  But just from Buddhism and Buddhism Meta.  I have other accounts that I'm fairly active on. Thank you!

It says on your Buddhism user page that your account is scheduled for deletion in 23 hours. The meta page doesn't have the notice, but I assume it will disappear as well...

Your request has gone through (one of the SE employees or other moderators got to it) and the account is scheduled for deletion in 23 (and change) hours.  The meta page is linked to your main profile page, so it doesn't need to be deleted separately. Your other accounts should not be touched.

Much obliged.  :-)

source: Stack Exchange

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/

sort: votes


text:
Closing Buddhism Stack Exchange Account
How do I close my buddhism stack exchange account only without affecting my other account on the stack exchange community?

http://meta.buddhism.stackexchange.com/questions/158/do-the-moderators-here-have-the-ability-to-delete-buddhism-stackexchange-account

Can you delete the account? Thanks.

Scheduled for deletion as per your request.

Just to give you some of my observations on the way out the door. The site reflects in many ways much of what is problematic in Buddhism. The creation of conceptual complexity instead of simplicity, the adherence to strict set preconceptions instead of flexibility, and intellectualism and book learning instead of direct experience.

Good points, but this isn't a Buddhist site; it's an expert exchange on Buddhism. After discussion and reading, I think it was my mistake to delete the last few one-line answers, but if they don't actually answer the question, they are better off as comments (I've converted one to a comment here).

Let me know if there is any way to change your mind; you have 23 hours to cancel the deletion.

Actually if you read the question I answered previously despite the question header, the question asked was actually how it is possible through Dual practise to attain Non-Duality. My answer was to correctly point to existential non-duality.But that said, I had conjectured I wouldn't be a good fit here, so its been a bit of an experiment on my part to see what would happen. No hard feelings.

This is not Buddhism zork, this is a crowd of beginners talking about Buddhism online. Direct experience is your frustration with us and the feeling of wrongness -- this is what dukkha is.

I have to admit, my non-expertise in Zen means I'm not really sure if your answer was an answer or not. It didn't seem like an answer (as per the heading anyway). I'm willing to return it to its position as an answer if you believe it actually answered the question.

I drifted into the Buddhism stack exchange on an advertised link in my other account,out of curiosity, I didn't go looking for it, had a feeling I probably wouldn't last long, haven't, and I'm content to leave it there, with no bad feelings on my part. Just not a good fit.

Its really just the way it has to be. On the one hand you correctly want answers offering reasonably objective pointers, on the other hand anyone offering direct insight is only as good as their insight - and how do you start making reasonably objective judgements about the quality of their insight when your experience may be very different to theirs? That could be a recipe for all kinds of rubbish being posted.

Unfortunately that's the nature of the beast. The stairway to Enlightenment is made of soft concepts (which are basically half-illusions), plus solid practice. All this talk hopefully stimulates behavioral changes in people daily lives. That's when real Buddhism begins.

@yuttadhammo Can you delete this account? Thanks. –  Rob Mac Hugh

@RobMacHugh your account is now scheduled for deletion in 24 hours.

all_licenses: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/


text:
Who corrects the spelling on the tags?
The spelling of the initial tags is...uneven.  I don't have enough reputation to correct these tags but, it being a new site does anyone have the reputation to make the necessary corrections?

Is this uneven meaning it bounces between Pali and Sanskrit terms for the same concept?

It means misspellings of English words.

There is a tag called "Abhidhamma" and a tag called "Abidhamma". The first spelling is correct. How can I (or can someone else do it for me), change all instances of the "Abidhamma" tag to an "Abhidhamma" tag?

You can always make suggested edits to improve posts.
The changes won't take effect immediately, though - they have to be reviewed first. While you're right that we don't have users with enough reputation (500 in private beta) to review the suggested edits yet, you don't need to worry about that - there will still be community managers (employees of Stack Exchange) watching the site. They have moderator powers, so they will be able to approve suggested edits, and will do so until we have enough users capable of doing it that they are no longer necessary.
Note also that suggested edits can always be approved (or rejected) by the person who made the post.
So if you see a tag that is misspelled or any other problem in a post, go ahead and fix it (and any other problems you see with the post, of course). It'll get approved sooner or later, i.e. either when the OP sees the suggestion or when a community manager stops by.

So, to answer your title question,

Who corrects the spelling on the tags?

I do! And so do you!


text:
What should I do about a question on hold that continues to get down-voted? I can't delete it
The question is this:

Christians now have online places of worship. Where are online
  sanghas? (A forum is not a sangha, IMHO) [on hold]

Every downvote is a hit to my reputation but I can't delete it because it has answers.  The suggested action is to flag it but won't that be an even bigger hit?

You have a few options.

Accept it and move on. The question is not egregiously bad, so once a few days have passed, people will stop noticing it, and it will stop being downvoted. This is what I recommend, honestly. You have been posting enough good contributions that the downvotes on that post are just a drop in the bucket.
Flag the post, select "other (needs ♦ moderator attention)", and describe your issue. I am not sure whether the community managers generally do anything about this type of situation, but it can't hurt to check. This will not cost you reputation - see below.
Ask Yuttadhammo if he would be okay with deleting his answer. If he says yes and chooses to delete his answer, you will then be able to delete your question (assuming other people do not also post answers).
You may request that your account be dissociated from the post altogether by contacting the Stack Exchange team (select "Other" from the menu). This is sort of a "nuclear option" and I strongly recommend against it unless you think the question is so incredibly bad that you cannot bear to have your name associated with it. (Actually, I am not even sure if it is possible to request this on a post-by-post basis rather than on a whole-account level.)

Note: I don't think it is appropriate that people are downvoting your question - it is not bad, per se; just off-topic.
Note also: the only time flags affect reputation is if a post is flagged as spam or offensive, abusive, or hate speech. If enough of those flags are cast on a post, the post will be auto-deleted and the person who made that post will suffer a -100 reputation penalty. Other types of flags do not directly affect your reputation.


text:
Closing account
I've attempted to have my account closed before by posting in meta and asking a moderator to close it and it still seems very much active. Today I received a message in reply to a question I answered. Just wondering what else to do?

I found your delete request here. Strangely that post currently belongs to the deleted 'user319' (which is also you!), but this could simply be caused by a caching issue.
Normally, requesting your profile to be deleted once is enough. I think I remember seeing posts on the main site by a deleted user319, so your account probably was deleted. I'm not sure why you received email notifications. That's not something that normally happens, at least not after several hours after deletion. Perhaps one of the mods can find the cause for that.
In any case, since you've reactivated your account to post this meta question, you'll probably have to ask for deletion again.

Can one of the mods here cancel my account. Thanks.

Bizarre. I'm not sure what happened, but I'll try it again.

Deletion is now scheduled. My theory is that your meta account was deleted before, but not your main site account. That should be rectified now.


text:
Help for newcomers: allowed questions
I've seen a few questions here on meta about what kind of questions are proper. All of them have answers, but I'm not aware of any place which gathers a synthesis of what are the "rules" of conduct particular to Buddhism SE.
The lack of an official place that we can point users to turns me silent in many Q&As that I find to be ill formulated. When I'm unable to try to stimulate an improved version of a Q or A, I avoid commenting "its off-topic because .." and derivatives since,  without an "official" reference, pinpointing problems is a fertile terrain for discord.
Visiting other sites (stack overflow, programmers, christianity, etc), their help center is quite specific to their domain, and thus, a very useful guide. There are often examples of off-topic questions (and which sibling site the user should go where the question would be on-topic), examples of unsuited questions (eg. "a survey of all Christian views on a certain subject"), or instructions to improve questions with unsuited formats (eg. short questions lacking context should share research done so far within the question, etc). Not to mention examples of bad question titles (and I think this question's title falls in that category).
Buddhism SE's help center, on the other hand, is too generic. It would be great to have it resourceful so we could post a "critical comment" with a link to it and then, providing specific details on how that specific Q/A could be improved (or, clarifying why exactly it is being downvoted/closed). Without official guide to refer to, interfering can be painful for both sides, were critics are seeing as hostile, pedantic, opinionated and the criticized ones feel unwelcome, insulted, lost.
So, is B.SE. in the process of formulating richer and specific instructions to be made available through the help system?

+1 I agree this would be good to start thinking about this but I don't know how to go about it. Does anyone know?

@CrabBucket I suspect that the site moderators are able (i.e. have the tools) to edit some parts of the help text. So the question is whether+when they should edit it, and what they should edit it to. They could a) do nothing b) talk among themselves privately, on a moderators' chat room, and then do it c) discuss it publicly. To do c) perhaps someone who wants to see it edited (e.g. you and/or Thiago) can post (as one or more answers to this meta-question) one or more suggested modifications/additions to the text. People could then comment on and vote on each specific suggestion/answer.

I think surveys and research related questions should be on topic. This may be problematic in Christian sites as it is faith based which would not be a issue in a Buddhist site.

@SumindaSirinathSalpitikorala AFAIK, the rationale for avoiding questions such as "a survey of all Christian views on a certain subject" is that few people are able to do that work, and the ones who are able will probably do better publishing in a journal or writing a book than answering here -- its kind of like asking for a prof of a conjecture on math overflow; sure is a good question, sure an answer is important, but something is off, considering SE's context. IMO, a more acceptable reformulation of such question would be "what are the main surveys published that focus on subject X".

@SumindaSirinathSalpitikorala Their help page says that questions like "a survey of all Christian views on a particular subject" are off-topic because they "have too many possible answers (many of which will be pure opinion)." ... that's presumably because there are dozens of different Christian denominations. IOW the question is "too broad".

Buddhism is not an academic field though it is subjected to different studies. These type of questions identify ways on what and how to practice so someone can choose what to do at a perticular juncture in the Suttas. Only if you are grasping on to the technique of a linage or a particular way advocate then this can be viewed problematic. Also Buddhism is about free inquiry. So comparison with a view to find a suitable technique which works for you should be permissible.

Any technique to do with meditation or technique should be on topic so it doesn't hinder free inquiry. If the technique is something completely different with no comparison to Buddhism then it should be off topic. E.g. Pranayama alone with no comparison to any Buddhist Meditation.

What ever the policy is it should not hamper free inquiry and should not be a basis of censorship.

In Buddhism comparison should be viewed as variation in a swimming style. If you take free style or something a coach will teach subtle tips to improve performance but generally within the main style. The coach may try slightly different variation so you should have the chance to pick and choose the best variations to practice as finally you will be going to the race. This is the light of how comparison questions should be looked at. Best way for this type of questions is to have everything on the table so you can try and investgate each technique and choose the best variations that works best

@SumindaSirinathSalpitikorala The point was that different sites have different types of question that are frequently asked at that site but off-topic. For example, "please review my code" is off-topic as Stack Overflow; for example, questions about motorbikes are off-topic at Bicycles. Does the Buddhism site have rules, does it have the experience that certain kinds of question are asked but are off-topic? For example it it OK to ask for a comparison between Buddhism and other religions? Is it OK to ask for personal advice? Is it OK to ask for a reference? Maybe all those are OK, and no ...

... site-specific rules are needed. The only site-specific 'rule' that I know of is that it's off-topic to ask, "Can you recommend a Buddhist group in [my city]?" (and even that's not very site-specific, i.e. a similar rule exists on most StackExchange sites).

OK. But anything to do with 1) the parth. 2) the dhamma and questions which 1) scrutinize it 2) scrutinise perticular interpretation 3) tries to elicit exact meaning 4) compares and contrasts interpretations should not be off topic.

Also any question to validate or being skeptical on a claim on Buddhism, an interpretation etc. Or eliciting further information to clear doughts should not be off topic.

The point is that even if a question pertains to the topic of the site (buddhism) the question still may be too broad. Asking for a sathipatana sutta analysis, contextualization and how different approaches are employed by practitioners pertains to buddhism, but is too broad -- literally, and factually, a phd thesis. I would be inclined to downvote such question if, say, analayo's advisor asked it here :) -- and suggest him to find a phd student to answer it in a research context, not in an SE site.

I've asked a specific question on meta about what is on or off topic. If we gravitate around a consensus maybe this could form part of the help text? http://meta.buddhism.stackexchange.com/q/342/157

I notice that the Christianity help page consists of links to meta topics.
It couldn't exist if the corresponding meta-topics didn't exist.
Do similar meta-topics exist here?

One meta-topic would be,

What is a good question?
We have found that the good questions on this site tend belong to one
  or more of the following categories:

Other meta-topics are, "What are bad questions?"
Similarly, what are the characteristics of good and bad answers.

I notice there aren't even any faq topics here. There are several FAQ topics on the Christianity site.
Another possibility is to write a single meta-topic which describes what good Q+A looks like. For example, this Welcome to New Users topic introduces the rules of the Skeptics site. The Skeptics site has firm rules, i.e.:

Every/any question must be about a "notable claim"
Every/any answer must include one or more references, which are evidence about whether the questioned claim is true or false.

I don't know whether there are similar rules or guidelines on this forum:

Maybe people (moderators) who have been here for some time know what the rules are (and can define them).
Maybe everyone knows what the rules are, so they don't need defining.
Maybe it's better not to have rules, so that users can react to individual/specific situations, questions, and answers.
Maybe we don't need rules yet (e.g. this answer suggested that other Buddhist sites discovered they wanted a "don't discuss vegetarianism" rule).

The lack of an official place that we can point users to turns me silent in many Q&As that I find to be ill formulated.

You could start that process: post a meta-question, "Is XYZ off-topic?", with an explanation of why you think it should be off-topic. Maybe most people will agree: in which case, there, you have the official place where that topic has been discussed and decided.

I've seen a few questions here on meta about what kind of questions are proper. All of them have answers, but I'm not aware of any place which gathers a synthesis

The few questions, are those these questions/topics?
Assigning tags on meta is one way to make 'important' topics findable, to "gather a synthesis".

Thanks chrisw. My feeling is that referring to meta topics is a little tiresome, for those who have to find the corresponding ones and link them. Also, the discussion may not come in a good format (or may have no clues at all) to guide the user to what would be an appropriate Q/A. IOW, I consider really, really helpful a good help system for users. But, as you suggested, I think that's what we have for now...

btw, I liked the skeptics meta-question-turned-one-destination-guide for new users

All "questions here on meta about what kind of questions are proper" are now tagged allowed-questions.
So, see allowed-questions for all the discussion on this topic.
There is as yet no single, comprehensive page which summarizes the consensus.


text:
Can I set the order of the Tags in a Question?
When I view a Question, the heading in the tab of my browser begins with the most popular of the Tags attached to the Question. For example: Are There Other People has the word philosophy - then the Title of the Question. I want "Nonduality" (a recently created Tag) to show instead, but it won't do that unless it is the only Tag.
Why doesn't it show the first Tag first? In other words, why sort the Tags in the Question and its display by popularity? Can I not determine what is most important?

related: http://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/109531/how-do-i-edit-the-order-of-tags-on-a-question &  http://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/77808/does-it-matter-the-order-you-tag-your-question  These say that the tags are sorted. I am asking to override that to make a little-known tag more visible.

SE Meta feature-request: http://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/261277/set-most-important-tag-so-that-it-shows-in-title-when-searching-and-tab-of-brows

Sorry as you've found out the tags aren't orderable and Buddhism SE can't change that. I really appreciate that you care about the non-duality tag. Thank you for that. It's people taking an interest in the site that make it what it is. In order to improve the tag you could

Provide or enhance a tag description.
Edit existing questions to include the tag if appropriate to that question
Edit the tag to provide links to some good examples of the tag.

Just suggestions. I'm happy to provide any help needed. I'll look out for any questions that might benefit from this tag.

Thank you, I appreciate your help and suggestions. There is a tag description. I could add links. Not sure what questions to add it to, but I will watch for any.


text:
Can one share buddhist jokes?
I found a cool buddhist joke and would like to share it with the community.
I'm asking here because i'm not sure if one is allowed to post such questions/answers on Buddhism SE.
The joke is not in violation with our "be-nice policy".

Jokes would be appropriate in any chat room.
This site's main chat room has been nearly/unusually inactive in the past, but feel free to use it in future. Some other sites (for example CodeReview.SE) have conversation in their chat room every day.
The chat room is basically unmoderated. Only a "be nice" policy more or less still applies, but if you want to talk about anything (jokes, work, family, the weather, whatever you like), in any format (e.g. dialog not just Q&A), then it's not off-topic in the chat room.
There are already some jokes in the chat room.


text:
How do i remove myself from this site?
I no longer wish to participate as a member of this site, and i wish to remove myself and all of my answers and questions!
Is this possible, please help.
I wish you all good luck on your paths!

For future reference, visit:
https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/help/deleting-account
for instructions on deleting your account.
You can also post a request on https://buddhism.meta.stackexchange.com/ and we will take care of it for you.
In this instance, the process for deletion of your account has now been initiated. In 24 hours, your account will be deleted. If you change your mind in the meantime, please let us know.

Your questions and answers will not be removed or deleted (see also the 'Subscriber Content' section of the Stack Exchange Network Terms of Service), but after your account is deleted they will show as being associated with an anonymous/deleted user account.


text:
Is this a site for questions about personal meditation experiences?
Does this site welcome questions about personal meditation experiences? Such as the meaning of certain experiences etc?

Welcome to the site.
I think those questions are at least permitted if not welcomed: those questions are tagged personal-practice.
The description of this tag says,

Questions containing or motivated by some aspect of personal experience. The experience can be during formal Buddhist practice or during everyday activity however the experience will be related to Buddhist practice or doctrine. The questions will necessarily have a subjective quality however the question or answers will contain references to Buddhist scripture, doctrine or an established teacher.

Beginners questions about personal experience (like "what does this experience mean?") tend to get (I'm not sure how to describe them) fairly "neutral" answers: maybe, most recently, like this one.
You'll probably get better answers if you specify what type of meditation you're practising.
Another type of question that can attract good answers is to ask some detail about "how to meditate?" (for example, most recently, like this one).

Compared with other sites, this site is relatively liberal about what questions are permitted.

It's very hard to answer questions about personal practice in this format, and I've seen very few quality answers, nor was I able to give many myself. The answerer either has to know enough about questioner's personal history, or has to have watched the questioner's behavior for enough time. Sometimes if you are very specific with your question (instead of the common "what does this mean" and "what can I expect" questions) and your question pertains to experiences common to many practitioners, you may get a good answer.

Although, the site has no restriction on questions regarding personal experience, I would personally refrain from asking any such questions for the following reasons:

If it is an experience that comes with advanced levels of serious meditation and is not very easily achievable, I will not be able to ask such a question in public forum without generating at least a hint of ego for having achieved this level.
If the experience sounds attractive and pleasurable in the conventional sense, it may create anxiety in the minds of other meditators who have not experienced such a thing. They may start to crave for such an experience and therefore, I will be creating a hindrance to their practice.
I cannot verify the credibility of the person answering my question in this forum and therefore would not rule out the chance of being misguided.

What I would generally do if facing any experience which bothers me or causes hindrance to my practice is:-

Remember that all experiences are changing and ephemeral. By clinging to or paying attention to a particular experience, I'm again repeating what I otherwise do when not meditating and therefore, I'm defeating the purpose of meditation and hampering my progress.
Use my breathing as the steering wheel to drive myself out of the overpowering situation. By focusing on the natural and normal breath, I can effectively divert my attention from the experience, yet not try to suppress it.
Take guidance from an experienced teacher with credibility.


text:
The Direction of Buddhism SE
I have chosen to leave the site as well.
This is no longer the Buddhism SE, that I used to care about and engage in.
I use to think that our SE was not as brutal as the other SE's. We had kindness, ethics and a high degree of respect among users. In the last 3 months this has begun falling away. There have been too much negativity and conflict.
When answering questions, my approach has always been founded in the practical/insight-meditational aspect of Buddhism and not in the scholarly/intellectual aspect. That approach does not seem valid anymore on Buddhism SE.
I think the site is changing from a Q&A Format into a Debate Format, where personal opinions and ideas, matter more than the actual teachings and the insight meditational part.
For me, that is not the direction i would like Buddhism SE to go in, and that is mainly why i'm leaving the site. I'm not saying this is a wrong direction, it's just not the direction that i prefer.
I will still do some moderation for a while, but not answer or ask questions.
Thank you for this time and may you all be well and happy.

EDIT:
After having done a 10-day retreat, I have changed my mind. I will not be leaving this site. It is a great way to spread the Dhamma. When one is bitten by the Dhamma, then one can only share it, so that other beings might also benefit from it.
The best way to share my knowledge and experience is to remain an active user on Buddhism SE. Also i missed the people here. I experienced some great support from the users on this site. I believe its important to contribute to that, so that the community can grow and more people can benefit from Buddhism SE.
May you all be well and happy.

Whatever you choose to do,  I wish you the best on your path :)

Thank you and welcome back.

Do you guys need help migrating the debates to the chat?

The tone of Buddhism.SE has definitely changed over the last few weeks or months.
There's been a few debates every week that I've been dragged into of late, but I've decided the best approach is to not participate.
I can understand the desire of some of us to want to debate ideas, but I can't see myself encouraging it for a few reasons.

Firstly and mainly it is because this website both in its charter and in its software just isn't set up to engage in fruitful debate. Given the software limitations especially, it's a waste of time and effort to try and do so.
Secondly, debates quickly devolve into point scoring, spiritual materialism, argument from authority and all of that dung beetle nonsense the Buddha warns about.
Finally, I am not constitutionally set up to debate. I used to enjoy a good verbal joust a few years ago, and would advance clever arguments and the like, but coincidental to my embarking on the spiritual journey was a dropping of desire to win or even engage in arguments. I know the Tibetans love a good argument, but perhaps that's not for me.

Since @Lanka told me about his plans I've also started to wonder.

Your thoughts here on debate, specifically related to Buddhist teachings and the uselessness (or usefulness) of it, echoes a thought which I have often has in my mind. The reference given by you on the Dung Beetle Nonsense has made it even more necessary for me to arrive at some conclusion on the thought. I wish to elaborate on my dilemna in the form of a question on Buddhism SE. I will be really glad if you can give a detailed answer with the reference you have quoted here for the benefit of those who have not read it here.

Well, I was just typing the question and I found that a simliar (if not the same) question has already been asked and answered (I would like to, but not sure how I can add a link to that question here). So, I'm not asking the question on Buddhism SE now. But, a question with regard to the format of this site has now arisen in my mind, which on getting some clarity, I intend posing on Meta.

I'm a new comer to this site and a beginner to the practise of Vipassana and Dhamma. I'm writing this post, having seen a few discussions on meta on the direction of this SE. I noticed that all those engaged in those discussions were veterans of this community and I felt giving a perspective to the moderators on what a newcomer like me thinks of this site or expects from it may help them decide on the future course.
Although, different people have different expectations from this site, mine was to strengthen my understanding of the nuances of the Dhamma, with answers from Buddhist experts (who, in my opinion are people who practise the Buddha's teachings and not Buddhist philosophers and scholars). My definition of a Buddhist expert, is based on an interaction I had with a professor of Buddhist philosophy in a leading university, whose thoughts I felt were absurd and totally in-congruent with the spirit of the Buddha's teachings. I was surprised that such a learned man can be so wrong and later I learnt that this person was although learned,had never actually practised meditation. That is when I realized that the Buddha's teachings and Buddhist philosophy are totally poles apart. That also strengthened my understanding on why the Buddha emphasized on self realization through insight meditation, since otherwise it is impossible to understand in totality, the spirit of His teachings. How can a person with a mind which has not yet experienced the subtleties of the truth pertaining to the mind and body at the experiential level, ever try to comprehend it at the intellectual level.
I came to know of this site through Ven. Yuttadhammo's posts. Soon after my arrival here, I saw his post declaring his quitting this forum. This was closely followed by his sentiments echoed by other senior members, whose past activity I had really liked and who, I felt were more of the practical+theory people and not just the theory people. So departure of all these people from this forum, makes me feel that this is just yet another social community to intellectually outwit each other, without much promise for a genuine learner like me.
Therefore, the intention of my post here is to urge the veterans to review the policies to decide clearly the purpose of this forum. So that all stake holders may know whether it is worthwhile investing further time and effort here to serve their purposes.
If the primary motive of this site is to uphold the teachings of the Buddha in the true spirit and help people progress on the path(I'm not sure if it is, though I feel it should be), I would like to offer my thoughts as follows.
I have found that there are very very broadly five categories of questions (and individuals who ask these questions):-

Those with regard to practice of the Buddha's teachings in some manner and  genuine doubts which hamper the progress of the individual on the Path.
Those with regard to finding the meaning of a Buddhist text or finding reference to a particular concept in any Buddhist text.
Those with regard to some curiosity or inquisitiveness about something related to Buddhism or the Buddha's teachings, which although not important for spiritual progress, may help the person find some foothold in the Enlightened one's teachings or help remove a doubt which was an irritant on the path.
Those which question the authenticity or credibility of a particular Buddhist text or writing.
Those which question the authenticity or credibility of the Buddha's teachings itself.

I have listed the above in the decreasing order in which I feel questions on this site should be encouraged or even entertained  and I really wonder if questions of the 5th category should be entertained at all. My justification for my stance is as follows:-

The 5th category of questions are merely for intellectual engagement and not for spiritual advancement, which may be categorized as futile and waste of precious time of a human being. For those who want to pursue, such questions for academic interest there are plenty of forums and content on the internet to help them.
The maximum questions are in the first four categories and which means people here are really looking for answers to their progress on the Noble Path. The 5th cateogry of questions prick as an obnoxious thorn in the path of these majority of the users, wandering through this site. With increase in the number of questions of this category, it becomes a case of searching for a needle in the haystack for a person like me.
If I were to join the Electrical Engineering SE and pose a question, " Does electricity really exist?", wouldn't it be considered absurd and unnecessary for those looking at much more serious and important issues?

This isn't good. I think we are simultaneously experiencing an upsurge in activity and a collapse. I don't want a debate format either. I think we really need a discussion about what the site could and should be. Over the last few weeks things have become harsher which isn't good either.
I'm pleased Buddhism SE is growing but his shouldn't be at the expense of established users wanting to leave. Good luck of course Lanka - I would personally like you to reconsider and help us get the site back on the right track but and the end of the day it's something we all do in addition to our other responsibilities so we should only contribute if we find it a positive experience. If we (you) don't then absolutely you need to stop. I am really sorry about that though.
I think the site is going off the rails a bit. :-(. I don't know what others think

I did not notice it was "going off the rails" now significantly more than ever. With appearance of certain individuals I can foresee the type of problems they will bring, so I expected something like this lately. But I don't think this is a reason for alarm. Nor should we solve the problem by alienating such individuals. I think the answer is to keep going in the same spirit we had, and give the newcomers a little more time to assimilate.

Perhaps we need to be a little more explicit in demonstrating the purpose of the site in our own questions and answers, and ignore the questions and answers we don't like, instead of "feeding the mara" in comments, which I too am guilty of.

@AndreiVolkov i think part of the solution might be tightening up our permissive question policy. We have more question volume now so maybe we can shut down the more opinion based questions? But maybe I'm overreacting generally

I think the site is going off the rails a bit. :-(. I don't know what others think

Moderators
Maybe the moderators have been too complacent or tolerant.
Until recently the users were already moderate and didn't need moderating.
Comments
Maybe moderators should be a little more active or pro-active in simply deleting extra comments without warning? Editing answers to keep any positive/constructive (even if non-traditional) content but to remove any negative/critical content?
Would it be better to err on the side of deleting slightly too much than deleting slightly too little?
Chat
I also think that maybe we could use the chat room more: for any (optional) discussions about Buddhism and/or personal beliefs which aren't a good fit the main site; and to discuss the site.
On other sites the regulars are in the chat room. A hypothetical example of what might happen there one day:

Look at that question which was just posted, do you think it's a bit hostile?
Well it's not a bad question, but the tone...
edits the new question on the site
What do you think now?
Nice edit! Now it's a good question.

If there's controversy ("why was my question closed?") sometimes that's discussed in the chat room instead of on meta ("well I closed it for reason but if you disagree with that come and discuss it with the rgulars in the chat room"). So people sort of discuss policy in the chat room, and meta is a bit more formal, e.g. for proposing new a policy and then voting on it.
Questions
Maybe it's time to review our current policy about moderating (or not moderating) questions.

I agree with CrabBucket's comment on "tightening up our permissive question policy".

@Lanka, I understand why you say this and share your concern. However, this is precisely why you should stay and continue your contributions.

The Lonaphala Sutta is apt in this scenario.

"Suppose that a man were to drop a salt crystal into a small amount of
  water in a cup. What do you think? Would the water in the cup become
  salty because of the salt crystal, and unfit to drink?"
"Yes, lord. Why is that? There being only a small amount of water in
  the cup, it would become salty because of the salt crystal, and unfit
  to drink."
"Now suppose that a man were to drop a salt crystal into the River
  Ganges. What do you think? Would the water in the River Ganges become
  salty because of the salt crystal, and unfit to drink?"
"No, lord. Why is that? There being a great mass of water in the River
  Ganges, it would not become salty because of the salt crystal or unfit
  to drink."

Similarly, Buddhism SE should be more like the River Ganges than a cup of water. Even if there is an increase in individual contributions that tend to be negative and debate-oriented, the rest of us here need to keep Buddhism SE running in the positive way that it should be. This is precisely why Lanka and Ven. Yuttadhammo should continue contributing.
Debate-oriented questions can either be answered in a civil and professional manner that ignores provocations, or it can be left unanswered altogether. However, I think it is unwise to "feed the mara" as Andrei calls it.
With regards to moderation, I think it is a bit of a gray area. I think our current state of moderation is not strict enough towards debate-oriented or contemptuous questions. But we may need to first rewrite our guidelines in such a way that the moderators may be properly empowered with the right reasons to act, rather than appearing to stifle the freedom of speech. I agree with CrabBucket's comment on "tightening up our permissive question policy".


text:
Turmoil, yet Balance
While there have been a bit of turmoil on Buddhism SE the last couple of days/weeks, I want to point out, that our Area 51 stats, are quite good looking. Take a look below.

I noticed this and I think the two things are related. One of the other moderators termed this kind of thing "growing pains" and I think it might be. Our site is now a successful stack exchange site and it is attracting a widening user base. As such it gone from quite a cozy environment were we all know each other to one where we are getting unfamiliar users with controversial opinions and/or less familiarity with our be nice policy.
It's a challenge for all users and one we are trying to work through. But we are all human beings with our human failings and I know we will get it wrong time and time again. But I hope we do manage to keep things going in a positive direction. I have faith that we will.

These are some good reflections and points. The site is evolving. No one really knows into what. Let's see what the future brings. I realized by reading Thiagos answer in the chat, that I used to believe the site was a buddhist site, but it's really not. It's a site "about" Buddhism as Thiago points out, meaning that it's not a Sangha.


text:
Is nonduality sufficiently different from Buddhism to warrant its own site on SE?
In theory, nonduality is not very different from Buddhism. In practice, I think it is.
There is a large and growing, widely dispersed "movement" of people studying Advaita, Emptiness and other forms and paths of nonduality. The language is sufficiently different that it is not Buddhism. I think a new site is in order. Thoughts please?

There are many schools of Buddhism that don't subscribe to non-duality. Advaita vedanta is its own system that is probably better classified as Hinduism than Buddhism, I think.

Thank you. I suppose you are right. Buddhism is about (as I understand it) the path to the end of suffering, and nonduality is about the end of whatever-the-heck thing thinks that it exists to suffer at all. I don't want to take refuge under Hinduism, I want to support the many people learning about nonduality with no real background or view at all. Maybe I need to ask the question somewhere else. It certainly didn't kick up much activity.

First of all you have to understand how the new sites are created in the StackExchange network: all new proposals go through Area 51.You can create a proposal that goes through different stages. Later in the beta stage sufficient activity is needed for the site to be accepted:

10 questions per day on average is a healthy beta, 5 questions or fewer per day needs some work.
1,500 visits per day is good, 500 visits per day needs some work.

You wrote in your comment: "I want to support the many people learning about nonduality with no real background or view at all."
The StackExchage network is designed on the principle of specific questions & answers and people usually need to have a little background information to be able to ask the questions.

Thank you. In the meantime I did look at Area51 and start a proposal. I don't know many people though and am not on social media, so I hope I can reach those who might be interested. I did think about what sort of questions might be asked and the background of participants. I looked at Hinduism SE which has an Advaita tag, but it is so full of questions about ancient stories, characters and myths that it didn't seem like it would fit for most people I know of who have had some kind of awakening. These experiences are varied and have little to do with religion or study. Its a shot in the dark!


text:
What is our question editing policy?
In recent discussions, the subject of how to moderate questions have been brought and we seem to be progressing on committing our own policy of participation in a helpful text.
In these discussions, it has been pointed out a few practices of editing question, but I'm a little uncertain what is our stance here.
On one hand, I've seen questions here been radically edited by other parties. On the other, this seems to go beyond what I thought was a general S.E. etiquete.
I can see the appeal of regarding questions in a more of a "wiki" attitude, where questions have not really "owners", and the community has more freedom to improve it. But I'm concerned that if we go in that direction beyond the etiquette mentioned above, changing the meaning of a question is problematic (even if the option to roll back is always available).
My questions are then:

Are moderators/users free to edit another's question  as they see fit?

if not..

Are moderators/users free to reformulate (and thus change the meaning of a Q) of old, unanswered questions (from another user and without his/her consent)?
Are moderators/users free to reformulate (and thus change the meaning of) questions with negative score and questions on hold where the author refuses or simply do not respond to reviews made in comments?

I read through the S.E. etiquete link and for sure we shouldn't be trying to change the meanings of any questions. I've revised the New User Welcome. Does it sound clearer now?
(If someone felt inclined to edit a question so much as to change the meaning; they should probably post a new question with that meaning themselves!)

I like it... :)

Thanks @ThiagoSilva for pointing out this issue. We might have ended up with some unnecessarily aggressive editing without clarification. I think early on, newer users receive points for editing too; so it's good to be clear about what's too much.

Editing someone else's question is feasible but difficult. For example, someone commented,

What I've seen on this Q&A forum is "Soviet Union" system with a lot of bossy people there! You write something and a million people edit your post as they want... What if i do not like their help?! I have a feeling that [...] bossy people have been trying to control everything!

How can you edit someone's question without causing offence?
The Stack Exchange Help page says quite clearly that collaborative editing is expected.

Why can people edit my posts? How does editing work?
All contributions are licensed under Creative Commons, and this site is collaboratively edited, like Wikipedia. If you see something that needs improvement, click edit!
Editing is important for keeping questions and answers clear, relevant, and up-to-date. If you are not comfortable with the idea of your contributions being collaboratively edited by other trusted users, this may not be the site for you.
When should I edit posts?
Any time you see a post that needs improvement and are inclined to suggest an edit, you are welcome to do so. The original author of a question or answer may always edit their own post, regardless of reputation level.
Edits are expected to be substantial and to leave the post better than you found it. Common reasons for edits include:

To fix grammar and spelling mistakes
To clarify the meaning of the post (without changing that meaning)
To include additional information only found in comments, so all of the information relevant to the post is contained in one place
To correct minor mistakes or add updates as the post ages
To add related resources or hyperlinks

Some of these reasons (adding resources) apply more to answers than to questions.
Grammar and spelling
Fixing grammar and spelling is questionable. I would be inclined to do it (to make the edit): because it makes the question easier to read; and because when I am posting in another language, I like it if people improve what I've written; however, some people don't like it if you 'correct their language'; so I don't know what the best balance is.
Currently there is no-one on this site, who makes minor copy-edits to almost every question -- and I'm happy with that.
Looking through my edit history I see I edited this (this one was an answer, though):

he is not a man or woman..The word Buddha doesn't even makes mention of male or female.

... to make it this instead:

He is not a man or woman. The word 'Buddha' doesn't even make mention of male or female.

To clarify the meaning of the post (without changing that meaning)
I suggest you do this:

If the meaning is unclear
If you're sure that the meaning is clear to you
If it's the OP's meaning that is clear to you
And if you can edit it without changing the meaning

In practice, this might mean "almost never edit"!
On some other sites it almost doesn't matter what the question is, because what's clear is the technical stuff included in the question, and it's always the attachment to the question that's being questioned. For example, what's being questioned is:

The evidence for or against the quote in any question on Skeptics.SE
The source code included in any question on CodeReview.SE

On this site it might be quite rare that the meaning is clear to you, unclear to others, and that you can edit it without changing the meaning.
For example, look at the edit history of this question:

Original version (closed as off-topic i.e. insufficiently related to Buddhism)
Add an introduction mentioning some Buddhist concepts to explain which concepts the question might be asking about
Deletes the paragraph after that introduction: i.e. deletes the original question!
Spelling and punctuation
Rewrite to try to preserve the meaning of the OP's original question

Changing the meaning is more likely to annoy the OP than just changing the grammar. Worse, changing the meaning will prevent them from getting an answer to whatever the specific question is they want to ask.
To include additional information only found in comments
Yes, this is usually good or helpful:

Someone posts a question
You post a comment to ask for some clarification
The OP posts a comment to reply to your comment (which clarifies the question)
You edit the question so that their question includes their clarification

Tags
Not in the above Help's list of edit reason is 'tags'.
Please see What are tags, and how should I use them?
I suggest that few people know how to use tags and/or what tags are in use on this site; that editing the list of tags hardly changes the meaning of the question; and that users who are interested in tags (and willing to discuss the tags being used, on meta or in chat) should feel free to edit/improve the tags associated with a question.

Are moderators/users free to reformulate (and thus change the meaning of) ...
I'd suggest no: never, or almost never.
Never edit a question so that it's no longer the question which the OP wanted to ask.
If you want to ask a different question then you can post that, as a new question instead
(but meta-topics like this and this warn we shouldn't ask new questions which people nobody really wants an answer to).
If you do that then you could also post a comment under the OP's question:

I posted This Other Question that's similar to yours.

Some related topics include:

Welcoming people to the site
Editing their posts without annoying them
Engaging people using comments (and on meta), asking them (again without annoying them) to help clarify their own questions if that's possible.

In conclusion I suggest it depends on how skillfully you do it (and that 'skill' is determined by the OP who asked the question); for example:

If you have edited in the past and if OPs tend to accept your edits and even thank you, then maybe you're good at it: please do it again when necessary.
Conversely if you noticed that your editing causes problems then it may be better to refrain.

Meta is for having discussions. Please comment or post a 'competing' answer if you disagree with this in any way.

You bring up good points about finding a balance regarding editing. For example an over eager editor might "fix" the spelling of colour to color. Not  necessary. ;-) Hopefully the revised version of the New Users Welcome will relay the basic concept that editing should be on the minor side (but not nitpicky) and never change the original poster's message. Maybe we should link the http://buddhism.stackexchange.com/help/editing page into it for clarity?

If you want to; or link to http://meta.buddhism.stackexchange.com/q/1524/254 ...  and there's a [meta-tag:faq] meta-tag that's not presently applied to any meta-topic but which could be in future.

Yes, well, finding a balance: but I'm not sure where that balance is, in the abstract. In the above I have IMO inclined towards not editing. Does it incline too far?

Yes, there are times when editing is definitely needed. For example here http://buddhism.stackexchange.com/posts/5370/revisions

That's a good example of a good edit: its original meaning wasn't wholly clear, to me for example, but yuttadhammo clarified what was asked (and didn't change what was asked). It would be one of the (perhaps rare)  exceptions to my "almost never edit" suggestion.


text:
Attachment of files to questions and answers
When looking at the editing help and the different options for text editing I see a lot of useful options.
Sometimes when writing an answer I would like to put in a reference to the texts. The thing is that I have some PDF-files about Buddhism that is no longer findable on Google and therefore cannot be linked to.
I was wondering if it in the future will be possible to attach files to questions and answers?
The file size could e.g. be set to be within 0-5 MB or maybe more or less. This way if one has a slower internet speed one can still download the files without it taking forever.

If they are core Theravada texts, I could host them in http://static.sirimangalo.org/pdf/

Thank you for the proposal Bhante. I just did a google search on the book and for some reason i just found it. Its called "The Great Chronicles of Buddhas". I do not know if this is core Theravada texts. I found the book here: http://www.bps.lk/olib/mi/mi014.pdf. What do you think?

FYI this feature was requested, and declined, in 2009: Please add a system to allow file uploads attached to questions and answers
Their recommendation there was that you upload the document yourself, to any file host.
I'd like to suggest that you also use copy-and-paste to extract up to a few paragraphs of text, from the document, into your question or answer, as well as posting a hyperlink to the whole document. That's so that people can read the most relevant text in your quote, then optionally follow your hyperlink to the whole document if they want to read more.

I don't think it is necessary to actually link to an online version... just like in a bibliography, simply citing the text should be enough, no? Of course, always nice to have the text available.

Yes an online version might be preferred (for convenience), not required. Answers can also reference printed, paper books.

@Chris. I see. I tried to search whether or not this question was asked before but apparently i did not do it thoroughly enough. Anyway thanks for the answer.

@Lanka FYI http://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/feature-request shows 18,960 topics tagged 'feature-request', of which 2,563 are tagged 'status-completed' and 1,015 are 'status-declined'.

@Chris. Thanks for the info but i do not know how to interpret it.

In the last seven months (since October 2014), they completed another 50 requests (out of 18000).

@Chris. Could you please explain in layman terms the connection between the question i asked and all these requests you mention. I simply cannot understand the relation. Is these 50 requests asking the same that i asked about attachment of files?

@Lanka Sorry. What I'm saying is that they have a lot of unimplemented feature-requests already. It's not that feature-requests like yours are unwelcome (it is kind of you to think of ways in which to improve the site, and to make texts available) however apparently the size of the their backlog is much larger than the rate at which they implement new features i.e. I think it unlikely that they can implement every feature request.

@Chris. Thank you for explaining that. 50 completed feature-requests out of 18000 pending. They must have a lot of work to do with all these users and different SE's.


text:
How do I close my Buddhism account?
I have visited the links This and This
But it doesn't tell me how to close the account without affecting other SE accounts (Unless I missed something... Apologies for that)
How can I close it? If a mod can take down my request, I would be really grateful.
Thanks in Advance.

Perhaps this help page has the information you were looking for: How do I delete my account?
It says,

If you have voted or posted, please contact the Stack Exchange Team:
Visit the contact form and select 'I need to delete my user profile.' After you contact us, the team will reach out with further instructions.

Thanks Chris. I hope my other profiles will be untouched if i use the form mentioned in the above contact form?

I got this email "You recently sent a request to have your Buddhism Stack Exchange profile removed. We're sorry to see you go! This email is just to let you know your request has been received, and we will respond with help ASAP." So I guess my other profiles are safe :) Thanks a lot again.


text:
How should we deal with fuzzy and hazy questions?
My question references to this question: "What puts out the mind".
Questions such as these i find very difficult to make sense of, yet even more difficult to give an answer to due to the fuzzy and hazy nature of them.
As i see it there are 2 elements in this question that makes it difficult to both understand and answer.

The framework is blurred. An example from the question could be:

"What reasons are there for supposing it does so after the mind wanders, not before or during?"
or
"But I'm interested in the question not as a facet of Buddhist doctrine: but the question of whether we "die" in the sense the atheist attaches to death"
The highlight i have made suggests that the question does not even belong to Buddhism SE since the questioner mentions that he is not interested in the buddhist doctrine but from an atheist viewpoint (as i understand it). That could mean that the question is better off asked on Philosophy SE.

The question asked deals with opposites - conventional vs ultimate reality. The questioner uses words such as "we" or "dies" implying that there is a person or being that dies. These are both concepts which do not apply when speaking of Nibbana which is an ultimate reality.

These different elements make the question difficult to both understand and answer. Do anyone have an advice how to deal with this type of questions?
I have dealt with it in the following way. I have downvoted the question and closed-voted it with the reason: "Unclear what your're asking". I also put a comment on the question.

Interesting. Thus far we have been very permissive with questions accepting question when they really don't make sense. My instinct is still to keep them open (and downvote appropriately) and see if anyone answers. If then don't and they end up mouldering away on the unanswered list then maybe close off. But I'm very conscious of our lack of questions and that does lower my quality bar - perhaps too low

Thanks for the input. I do understand your concern since i have the same concern. I had a chat with Chris about this very topic. We are at 3,9 questions per day and to be free from beta we need 10 questions per day. So that definitely is worth having in mind if we want to graduate from beta. As i see it the issue is "question-quality vs. amount of questions" and we do need more questions. Although if the quality becomes too low we might be in conflict with the requirement of providing high quality content on Buddhism SE.

The question volume vs quality also interesting. I don't know if you caught up with this discussion http://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/257614/graduation-site-closure-and-a-clearer-outlook-on-the-health-of-se-sites but it seems like question per day is a key metric for site graduation. That said there seemed like an increased recognition for lower volume sites so more questions good but not a disaster if we never get to 10 questions per day

Yes Chris showed me that question too and im very happy to see that "young" SE's now have the oppertunity to make it even though they dont have 10 questions per day. Although i still think we should have quality in mind when asking and answering questions. I actually do not think its a problem here. Once in a while there pops up questions like the one here but not that often.

I've been pleasantly surprised when a skillful answer to a "fuzzy" question suddenly cleared things up and I learned something from both question and answer. i.e. even if I don't understand it, someone else might. This answer is an awesome example of that happening. (Check the original version of the question prior to editing for details.) For this reason, I think there is value to being very slow to close questions. If much time passes and no one can save, close then.

@Robin. Thank you for posting this. I see your point and i agree with you. When fuzzy questions can recieve such answers then there can definitely arise something useful out from them. I guess i saw it only from the perspective of the fuzzy question and overlooked the potential answer-perspective.

"I have downvoted the answer" - do you mean to say "question"?

@Bhante. Yes, thank you for pointing that out. I have edited the question now.

Being new to this forum and still on a learning curve I'm am a bit unclear and hazy on things around here, but thought I might be able to provide a newbie's perspective.
From my experience as a psych sometimes just asking the question in whatever manner the person has mustered up the courage to do so is a significant and sometimes clarifying moment for them. The answers or direction evolves as new information becomes available. The potential of alternate and non proscriptive solutions and the sharing of weird and wonderful 'data' is greatest in the moments of haziness and non clarity. There is a freedom in expression if the parameters of the query are broad.
Sometimes the process of finding clarity by ones self, in a group or online is lifesaving and a journey that when shared provides a forum for fuller understanding by others who may not have to plumb the depths of despair or confusion because they engaged in the clarification of that hazy issue. Does that make sense?
Im not suggesting for one moment that all questions need to be hazy, just saying that it would be unfortunate if that option was taken away. After all, if you can ask the question with clarity you are well on your way to understanding the issue... no?

If I understand you correctly - i think you are right. We are in an unusual position and when people come to the site (or Buddhism generally) they are often hazy and just have a whole bunch of half formed ideas. I would like to see us try to help these people (which I think on the whole we do)

Agreed. As a Q & A site with a "best answer" format we are bound to a rather strict format requirement for questions and we've had several threads here on Meta with trying to reconcile this with (a) a natural response to want to help when help is asked for and (b) the very practical issue that the site doesn't yet receive a "healthy" amount of questions per Stack Exchange standards which would be an average of 10 per day. So for both reasons we try to  allow as many questions as possible sometimes assisting the OP with editing their question to meet requirements without changing their meaning.

Some people made suggestions, described in the "Unclear what you're asking" section of this answer.
I suggest you may downvote if you expect that no-one will be able to edit the question and/or answer it.
You may have seen that some people have been able to make sense of other answers and edit them accordingly, and so even if a question looks impossible, maybe someone else can make sense of it.
So far we're not getting many closed questions nor many unanswered question, so I hope that's good.
If a question is downvoted, and not edited nor answered, perhaps we'll eventually consider closing or deleting it. Or in fact (if it's downvoted) perhaps it will be deleted automatically after 30 days.

Thanks Chris for linking to this post. I was searching for guidelines such as these.


text:
Choosing a book for Book of the Month [June]
Someone suggested that one good way to use this site can be to study books together, and post any questions from those books that we may have. The idea is that the text should be one that will stimulate our question-asking faculties, which we then apply by asking questions about the book of the month on Buddhism.SE. Everyone is free to participate.
Last month, the book selected for reading was Good Question Good Answer.
I'm opening this thread to get suggestions of buddhism books for reading during this month. One book per answer, please; top voted answer by June 15th can be our book to be studied this month.
There's really no restrictions for book suggestions, other than being available in english. However, books that are freely available are likely to be favored.

Shamefully I've not finished last month's book yet so I'm going to duck out of this one and not suggest anything this time. Looks like we've got some good suggestions going anyway. Cheers

Don't hold yourself from suggesting though: maybe you came across something that many would find an interesting pick? :)

There are many books recommended in this topic: Introductory books to Buddhism

Any interest this month in "Women in Buddhism - Question & Answers" by Chatsumarn Kabilsingh Ph.D.? (Theravada tradition)

Ven. Chatsumarn Kabilsingh provides answers to questions often asked about women and the ordination issue and related topics. She responds to such questions as: In the Buddha's time what role did women play in Buddhism? Why cannot women become buddhas? What is the Buddhist attitude towards prostitution? What is an attitude of a Buddhist towards abortion? What is the unique characteristic in American Buddhism which might interest a feminist?

At 70 pages, it would be short and potentially interesting reading. :)

we have a winner! I'll post the choice later on today :)

Here's one that looks terribly interesting to me and happens to be freely available online (legally or illegally, I can't say):
The Boundaries of Knowledge in Buddhism, Christianity, and Science
This volume brings together insights from religion (represented by Buddhism and Christianity) and science to address the question, What can we know about reality? Here science and religion engage each other in the human endeavour to understand a reality tantalizingly beyond our ability to understand fully.

Good, Evil and Beyond Kamma in the Buddha's Teaching by Bhikkhu P.A. Payutto
No. pages: 129
From the first pages:

Universally acknowledged as Thailand’s foremost Buddhist scholar,
  Venerable P. A. Payutto’s works range widely, from detailed exposition of the Suttas and Vinaya to consideration of the problems of society, environment, economy, law, and science and technology – all of these books and talks are based on an exceptionally profound and comprehensive grasp of the Buddha’s Teaching, which is given full expression in his ‘magnum opus’, Buddhadhamma, a book of over one thousand pages.

From Introduction:

The work presented here is based on a single chapter from
  Buddhadhamma, by Venerable P. A. Payutto. Buddhadhamma is
  perhaps the author’s most formal and ambitious book to date

However, I quickly read a few pages and it seems to be very accessible. Also from Introduction:

It is my belief that the present book is an invaluable reference
  for both the casual student and the more committed practicer
  of Buddhism.

There's also a chapter about misunderstandings of kamma in a Q&A style.
Contents:

Understanding the Law of Kamma

Kamma as a law of nature
The law of kamma and social preference
The meaning of kamma

a: Kamma as intention
b: Kamma as conditioning factor
c: Kamma as personal responsibility
d: Kamma as social activity or career

Kinds of kamma

On Good and Evil

The problem of good and evil
The meaning of kusala and akusala
Kusala and akusala as catalysts for each other
Gauging good and bad kamma
Primary Factors
Secondary Factors

The Fruition of Kamma

Results of kamma on different levels
Factors which affect the fruition of kamma
Understanding the process of fruition
Fruits of kamma on a long term basis –
Heaven and Hell
Summary: verifying future lives
Kamma fruition in the Cula Kammavibhanga Sutta

Kamma on the Social Level

The importance of ditthi in the creation of kamma
External influences and internal reflection
Personal responsibility and social kamma
Responsible social action

The Kamma that Ends Kamma
Misunderstandings of the Law of Kamma

Who causes happiness and suffering?
Beliefs that are contrary to the law of kamma
Can kamma be erased?
Do kamma and not-self contradict each other?

In Conclusion

The general meaning
Intelligence over superstition
Action rather than prayer
Non-adherence to race or class
Self reliance
A caution for the future

I'm interested in the following because it might help with understanding what the Buddha said.
How Buddhism Began –
The conditioned genesis of the
early teachings

Its table of contents is,

Debate, Skill in Means, Allegory and Literalism ... page 1
How, not What: Kamma as a Reaction to Brahminism ... page 27
Metaphor, Allegory, Satire ... page 65
Retracing an Ancient Debate: How Insight Worsted
  Concentration in the Pali Canon ... page 96
Who was Akgulimala? ... page 135

It's written by Richard Gombrich who is or was

Boden Professor of Sanskrit at the University of Oxford from 1976 to 2004
Founder-President of the Oxford Centre for Buddhist Studies
Past President of the Pali Text Society (1994–2002)

Summary

This book, the second edition of How Buddhism Began, takes a
  fresh look at the earliest Buddhist texts and offers various
  suggestions how the teachings in them had developed. Two
  themes predominate. Firstly, it argues that we cannot understand
  the Buddha unless we understand that he was debating with other
  religious teachers, notably Brahmins. The other main theme
  concerns metaphor, allegory and literalism. By taking the words
  of the texts literally – despite the Buddha’s warning not to –
  successive generations of his disciples created distinctions and
  developed doctrines far beyond his original intention.

From the Introduction,

The main purpose of this book is to present the Buddha’s ideas in
  their historical context.
My most prominent theme, pursued in chapters II and III, is the
  relationship of the Buddha’s ideas to the brahminical ideas of his
  day
In chapter IV I discuss the problem of monks who are said to be
  ‘released by insight’ (pañña-vimutto) and yet to lack the
  supernormal powers which result from accomplishment in meditation,
  specifically in the four jhana
I show in chapter V that the legend of
  Angulimala, the brigand with the garland of human fingers, is
  incoherent in its traditional form. Very small changes in the text
  transform Angulimala into a worshipper of Siva and thus make
  sense of his behaviour. The commentators probably knew as little
  of Saivism several centuries before their time as they did of
  brahminism.

I have this one unread, so it would be a nice motivation to put it in the front of the queue :) -- I did read Gombrich's "What the Buddha Thought" which I really liked (both his pleasant style and erudition).


text:
The Book of the Month [June] is: "Women in Buddhism - Question & Answers"
The most voted book for this month [June] was Women in Buddhism - Question & Answers by Chatsumarn Kabilsingh Ph.D. (Theravada tradition). 70 pages.

Ven. Chatsumarn Kabilsingh provides answers to questions often asked about women and the ordination issue and related topics. She responds to such questions as: In the Buddha's time what role did women play in Buddhism? Why cannot women become buddhas? What is the Buddhist attitude towards prostitution? What is an attitude of a Buddhist towards abortion? What is the unique characteristic in American Buddhism which might interest a feminist?

What is "book of the month"?
One good way to use this site can be to study books together, and post any questions from those books that we may have. The idea is that the text should be one that will stimulate our question-asking faculties, which we then apply by asking questions about the content of book of the month on Buddhism.SE. In the beginning of every month, we start a thread here on meta to suggest and vote for a book. By the 15th, the top voted suggestion is selected. Everyone is free to participate.
Last month, the book selected for reading was Good Question Good Answer.
Enjoy the reading!

Great, thanks for doing this :)

I read this but I found no questions to ask.
It gave me some previously-unknown-to-me insights into contemporary Buddhist societies (e.g. that there are mae jis in Thailand).

I agree. I was surprised at how much this referenced Thai social norms in regard to Buddhism; but I found it very interesting. I also didn't end up with any questions but did use the information from the book to answer 3 (older) questions.


text:
How do i review this low-quality-post?
The answer in this question has been flagged as low-quality and i'm now trying to review it.
I find it very difficult to review it. I have put the following comment to the answer:

"Thanks for the story i didnt know this one and it was nice to get some background info to the rule. As Chris said it does however not answer the question. Also one-line-answers and link-only-answers cannot be considered answers. Here is a guide for new user on Buddhism SE which you might find useful: meta.buddhism.stackexchange.com/questions/1502/…"

Still the review says that i must pick one of the 4 options; Looks OK, Edit, Deletion, Skip in order to clear the queue. What do i choose? I was thinking of Looks OK but it does not look OK in its current framework.
This is currently how is looks in the low-quality-review after posting a comment. You might have to zoom in to see the pic.

I think normally once you have added a comment it gives you an option of "I'm done". You may have to initially select Edit though. The comment you left was very helpful to the person answering as you gave both specifics on how the answer could be improved and linked the Welcome info too
Perhaps the "I'm done" option only appears after the comment has been added?
Or possibly that only appears on other types of reviews other than low-quality post. It's been a while since I've had a low-quality to review
; so I can't be 100% sure.

Thanks for the reply Robin. I thought too that the "I'm done" option would appear but it does not exist in "low-quality-reviews". There are only the 4 options listed above. In the review it says this: "You can also leave a comment on the answer, but you will still need to choose one of the above actions to clear the post from the review queue".

I guess i will pick the "Looks OK" option since i cannot edit the answer, i will not recommend deletion and i will not skip it.

Strange. So it doesn't count leaving a comment as an "edit"?

Maybe someone else will know. I'm glad you asked so we'll all know for next time. :)

Robin i have attached a picture to my question so you can see how it looks. Its a bit odd since the other reviews have the "I'm done" option. Anyway thank you for replying i was at a loss with this one. I did now choose the "Looks OK" option to clear the queue.


text:
How do i insert a hyperlink into a comment?
I have tried to insert a hyperlink in a comment but i cannot do it.
I want to have the link embedded so one can just press the word and then arrive at the link.
See picture.

Markup for comments is defined here:
_italic_ and **bold** text,
inline `code in backticks`,
and [basic links](http://example.com).

Click here to see the markup for this answer (because this answer uses the same syntax for hyperlinks as the syntax you can use in a comment).
So the text used in the comment which you illustrated is
Hello and welcome to Buddhism.SE. What you have under the main question is not clear. We've put together some information to help you get started [here](https://buddhism.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1502/i-am-a-new-user-here-at-buddhism-se-what-should-i-know-before-i-post?).

Beware that there must not be a space between the ] and the (.

Thanks for the help Chris.

Just to add to Chris's answer, if you ever forget, just click on the little orange "help" text beside the comment entry box:

Thank you Bhante. I feel a bit embarrassed now that i didnt even see that.


text:
I created a Tag, but can't find it to fill in the definition
I was just granted the Create Tags privilege, so I created one and edited a question to pop it on there. The message says my edit must be peer-reviewed before being accepted. OK. But how can you review my proposed new Tag if I cannot fill in a description? Sure, kill it later if you don't like it, but at least let me get my pitch in.

These questions will periodically be bumped to the top of the Active list until/unless you accept an answer.

A tag is created when a question is using that tag.
The question you edited isn't using the new nonduality tag because that edit to the question hasn't been approved yet (and therefore the new tag doesn't exist yet).
Are there several other questions which ought to have that new tag?
Also many of the tags we use are Pali. But this answer suggests that nonduality is more a feature of Mahayana than Theravada. Is there another, more common, (non-English) word for it than non-duality? The Sanskrit "Advaita" exists but according to Wikipedia it's more Hindu than Buddhist? How much overlap is there between the existing nagarjuna tag and non-duality?
IMHO we have too many tags at the moment: I say that because half of the existing tags are used for only one or two topics. That's not to say we can't create more... but ...

Oh, the Irony! One of my questions is tagged Nagarjuna because the Nonduality Tag didn't exist yet, and I was not allowed to invent it. I see Nagarjuna to be a person rather than a practice or method or even a goal. So, I would not think most people would see that tag as the same as Nonduality. Of course, no one created the tag before, so there is no way to know. I am not aware of any better word in English. Advaita is one 'variety' of Nonduality, and there is another major one (Emptiness) and some minor ones, so we need One Tag to Rule Them All, as I see it. I might put it on other questions.

How many topics would it apply to? If people want to find a topic they can use Search. The real value of a tag is two-fold: to identify topics which don't contain the word e.g. [tag:five-precepts] to tag topics about ethics or alcohol which might not include the word "precept"; and (theoretically) so that users can create a filter (e.g. if hypothetically some user were only interested in 'meditation' or 'reference-request' topics they could set their profile to filter based on those tags).

Are there a handful (e.g. 5) topics related to nonduality, which could use that tag?

Well, I started to create an entire SE site about Nonduality on Area51, but I do not know how to gain enough followers for it to go forward. I think that the lack of awareness of it as a path or method (Self Inquiry) or the widespread prevalence of it is hindering people from being able to learn about it. I could talk about it all day. I am writing a book about using nondual practices in daily life, which does not rely on anyone being "enlightened". But is this site where it belongs? Not sure.

See my relevant Question: http://buddhism.stackexchange.com/questions/9594/what-does-nonduality-correspond-to-in-buddhism

Do you have any idea how many topics on this site are related to nonduality at the moment: are there as many as, for example, 5 topics already? If not, will there be any new nonduality-related topics soon, which would want to use that tag? It's no big deal, just that (IMO) it's a bit pointless to create tag for just two topics, which is how most of the existing tags have been defined.

Looking... Philosophy, Modern-World, Mindfulness, Meditation-Insight, Comparative-Religion, Satipatthana, Beginner, Samatha, Daily-Life, Western-Philosophy, Stages-Of-The-Path, Self, Samadhi, Right-Effort, Reality, Insight, Sunyata... If even 5 of those are actually relevant, you have your list. Did I understand rightly?

@nocomprende Are there 5 questions which could use the tag? One is http://buddhism.stackexchange.com/q/9594/254 ... and you're proposing that http://buddhism.stackexchange.com/q/9431/254 should be tagged nondualism ... http://buddhism.stackexchange.com/q/1585/254 looks like another ... any others?

Sorry for the confusion: when I say "topic" I mean "question", not "tag".

The 3rd one, yes, but I am reluctant to associate Nonduality strictly with philosophy. It is a daily practice leading to deeper awareness, perhaps like Vipassana? I will try to find more Questions that I would tag.

nonduality is a subject worthy of a tag, IMO. Pretty important debate in Buddhism (early Buddhism doesn't support the concept, but the argument is a big one).

@yuttadhammo Thanks for your input. A tag exists if/when it's attached to at least one question. Ahmed, rightly or wrongly, removed it from this question. Instead I just now added it to this question, so now the tag exists, its description can be created/edited, and it can be attached to other questions as necessary.

@nocomprende The [tag:nonduality] tag exists now, please see the comment above this one.


text:
Quick overview of the essential Dhammas in Buddhism
There is this great website which gives a quick overview of the essential dhammas in Buddhism together with translation of pali terms and an overview explanation of the Tipitaka. I find this very useful as quick-encyclopedia.
The Dhamma list is also available for download as a PDF-file.
I tried to copy and paste the list into a text box here but its very difficult since it destroys the formatting and it takes a long time to clean it up.
Could we somehow get the list on Buddhism SE so other users can benefit from it too?

I've just put another idea in this meta question of where we could put useful resources such as your Dhamma list. Might be a good place to keep it?

That's enormously helpful. I was going to ask a question about all the lists to see if someone had collated them - but it's already been excellently done here. I'm not sure about the best way to get a list of resources.
What about a meta question (or a main site question as a wiki) asking for peoples favourite resources (like the classics such as access to insight and the lesser known). When we could edit it down and format it then perhaps put a featured tag on it.
Or there could be another way to do it. I think of ChrisW as the stack exchange engine expert so maybe he has some ideas

Sounds like some good ideas. Let's see what Chris will say about it. I could do it the old fashion way and copy/paste it into an answer and then format it all so it will look like on the website it links to. Problem is when one copy/paste it it is inserted as a big clump of text. I do think that we should do something since this is really beneficial, especially for new comers who needs to have a quick dhamma-overview when studying the texts.

That is a really nice, concise "list of lists" for a more Theravada based study. There would be several differences for students of Mahayana such as 6 perfections rather than 10, focus on Bodhisatva rather than 4 stages of enlightenment I think, etc. But the idea of a wiki of helpful links seems like a really good idea. There have been a lot of great links built into particular answers that would be wonderful to have in one place as a resource. Is there a quick way of finding out what wiki's we already have? Maybe I've just missed something obvious but I can't seem to spot our current wiki's.

@Robin111 http://buddhism.stackexchange.com/search?q=wiki%3ayes%20is%3aquestion

Help with advanced features of Search: How do I search?

Great, thanks @ChrisW! I've been wondering what our wiki selection consisted of. :)

@Robin. Good you mention the other traditions we should of course also have them in an answer too. I have posted a question about it now. Would you mind checking it and see if it looks OK or if something should be altered?

@Lanka, I think your question looks good. Great idea. :)


text:
How should this "re-open"-post be reviewed?
This post has been altered and more text added. I think it is more stream lined now.
Although now a new issue is that the question is too broad. It has multiple questions and some of them seem heavy to answer.
Should this post be reopened or remain closed?

In a comment the OP wrote,

I tried to make the question narrower. Hope that makes it conformimg to the rules.

It seems to me that this site doesn't have many rules;
but one of those few rules is that the question must be about Buddhism.
Is this question exactly (only) 50% about Buddhism?
Earlier question have been slightly asymmetrical:

Can a Buddhist practice Christianity?
Can a Christian practice Buddhism?

Because of their asymmetry, each of those questions can be answered from a primarily Buddhist point of view.
IMO some problems with the current question include:

Because the OP doesn't explain their motive for asking the question, therefore you can't guess what additional information they might find useful in an answer, i.e. how to approach the question.
Because this question is symmetric between Buddhism and Catholicism; it might need as much expertise with Catholicism and with Buddhism to answer.
An article like 'I wanted a faith that was deeper': Jesuit priest and Zen master with someone who is, allegedly, both a Jesuit priest and a Zen roshi implies it's possible to make room for both in one's life ... but it's also easy to list ways in which (or to find quotes which prove) that they're incompatible ... so, who's right? What's worth saying on the subject?
The question is asking for "contradictions and inconsistencies".
I don't know what the OP wants. Should I list the "top ten" ways in which Buddhism seems to contradict Catholicism or vice versa? Is it worth mentioning any ways in which they're similar, or even any ways in which they're compatible?
In this comment Andrei wrote,

A bad question is inclined toward flamewars.

He was talking about discussions of "C versus Pascal" as a programming language; but by analogy was talking about discussions which put "one school of Buddhism versus another". If "one school versus another" shouldn't be asked because it's not "inclined towards" useful answers then IMO the same is true for "one religion versus another".

I wish I could suggest how to improve the current question (but I can't, I don't know how to).
The current answer quotes the Buddha's distinguishing Buddhism from a faith-based God-worshipping religion. Is that a good answer to the question, is that all it takes to answer the question?
That simple answer generated 10 comments between two people.
Maybe this a question that's better suited for a discussion forum than for a Q+A forum.
In any case I'm not in a hurry to reopen the question as-is:

It's already been more-or-less answered in the dozens of previous questions which those tags
It's only 50% about Buddhism
It encourages discussion not answers
It requires expertise which various users of this forum aren't likely to have (e.g. the Jesuit priest I mentioned above presumably knows vastly more about Catholicism than you or I do)
It's biased towards incompatibility (asking about incompatibility without asking about compatibility)
It might be better if it were different somehow, but I don't know what changes to suggest (because I don't know why the OP is asking, whether they're read those earlier questions and answers, how much or what if anything they know already about Buddhism and/or Catholicism, etc.)

Thank you for a comprehensive answer! Just the info i needed. I agree with you on several points, especially the 50% buddhism aspect, that it has answers in many more questions,  that it's difficult to know what OP wants in an answer and most importantly the question tends towards discussion which our forum is not suited for. Based on the above i will review the question to be "remained closed".

I think I'm on the permissive side when it comes to questions but I would personally vote to reopen this question. I'm a supporter of comparative-religion questions and I've argued for them here. I think there are valid questions to be asked and the contradictions between Christianity and Buddhism is a fair topic that will have definite answers. I have to say that the number of comments on the only answer is concerning but there have been many questions where people get a bit chatty on the comments (then are moved over to chat itself).
That said I'm not going to really argue for this one. I respect Chris's answer and it is typically well argued. Unfortunately as a mod my vote is binding so I'm unable to vote to reopen without it being very undemocratic. If I wasn't a moderator and had a normal vote I would vote to reopen this one.

Would you personally be able to answer the question, answer it well, if it were open? My main reason for closing it was that IMO it wouldn't attract good answers (or that user5380's answer might be sufficient already). For example I thought Ryan's comment about faith was more Protestant than Catholic, but I'd like to avoid debating Catholic doctrine on this site: I think that subject is off-topic. I respect what you say about a binding vote. Unless you can answer it yourself, let's see what other people say, and whether anyone else posts here to explain how they might answer it.

I asked this question to know what fundamental difficulties arise when someone decide to keep its religion while adhere to the Buddhism. Or is it possible at all to accept both teachings.
For an example, A Muslim must sacrifice a sheep in the sake of God. while killing a sheep is against the Buddha teachings. then one might say it is impossible to be Muslim and Buddhist at the same time.

Here are five precepts of the Catholic church and here are five precepts of Buddhism. Apparently the previous Pope (John Paul II) was critical of Buddhism but many Buddhists wrote that he misrepresented Buddhism (similarly I expect that many Buddhists might not know a lot about how Catholic doctrine can be interpreted).


text:
Choosing a book for Book of the Month [July]
What is "book of the month"?
One good way to use this site can be to study books together, and post any questions from those books that we may have. The idea is that the text should be one that will stimulate our question-asking faculties, which we then apply by asking questions about the content of book of the month on Buddhism.SE. In the beginning of every month, we start a thread here on meta to suggest and vote for a book. By the 15th, the top voted suggestion is selected. Everyone is free to participate.

Last month, the book selected for reading was Women in Buddhism -- Questions and Answers.
I'm opening this thread to get suggestions of buddhism books for reading during this month. One book per answer, please; top voted answer by July 15th can be our book to be studied this month.
There's really no restrictions for book suggestions, other than being available in english. However, books that are freely available are likely to be favored.

The Foundations of Buddhism, 1998 by Rupert Gethin
This full text PDF file is the first link on Google: http://www.ahandfulofleaves.org/documents/The%20Foundations%20of%20Buddhism_Gethin_1998.pdf
Buddhism is a vast and complex religious and philosophical tradition with a history that stretches over 2,500 years, and which is now followed by around 115 million people. In this introduction to the foundations of Buddhism, Rupert Gethin concentrates on the ideas and practices which constitute the common heritage of the different traditions of Buddhism (Thervada, Tibetan, and Eastern) that exist in the world today. From the narrative of the story of the Buddha, through discussions of aspects such as textual traditions, the framework of the Four Noble Truths, the interaction between the monastic and lay ways of life, the cosmology of karma and rebirth, and the path of the bodhisattva, this book provides a stimulating introduction to Buddhism as a religion and way of life.

well, that one just moved to the top of my queue :)

A concise history of Buddhism by Andrew Skilton
Buddhism is a widely diverse religion, with many traditions handed down through the centuries. The newcomer seeking to understand the sometimes contradictory spiritual texts can find it daunting. A Buddhist and professor at Oxford University now unravels these varied religious threads and creates a wonderfully clear and compact look at Buddhist history. From the ancient Indian context to Buddhism in countries beyond, from the Mahayana sutras to Tantra, it presents an account of the religion's development up through the 19 the century, its doctrines and its schools. But the study also covers the context in which Buddhism developed, the external events that had an impact on the religion. Using the most recent scholarship available, it reflects on the Buddha and his teachings, the paths to awakening, the development in the Sangha, the Tripitaka and the Abhidharma, the end of Buddhism in India, and the practice of Buddhism all throughout Asia. A truly enlightening guide.

Any interest in Between The Lines (Volume 1) An analytical appreciation of the Buddha's Life?

"Some 2500 years ago in ancient Northeast India, a young, brilliant and courageous man discovered the sublime answer to how the mind works and how to realise unconditioned happiness and bliss. For the next 45 years, he devoted his life to teaching the doctrine that helped bring unparalleled happiness, peace and relief to numerous people long after his death. In time stories began to emerge proclaiming his greatness and his near-divinity status. Over generations and into distant lands, those stories took on a life of their own. Eventually the real man is buried under a mountain of beautiful fantasies and magical tales. Scholars in Buddhist studies have never lost sight of the historical Buddha. There is a beautiful story to tell about the real man but the materials never quite made it to the mass market because academic books are generally hard to read and appreciate. This book seeks to bring the historical Buddha back into the popular psyche. That story is as intriguing, and is perhaps even more inspiring than the best fantasy story that had ever been woven."

(Free 249 page pdf)


text:
The Book of the Month [July] is: “The Foundations of Buddhism”
The most voted book for this month [July] was The Foundations of Buddhism (PDF here) by Rupert Gethin (Professor of Buddhist Studies and current president of the Pali Text Society). 352 pages.

Buddhism is a vast and complex religious and philosophical tradition with a history that stretches over 2,500 years, and which is now followed by around 115 million people. In this introduction to the foundations of Buddhism, Rupert Gethin concentrates on the ideas and practices which constitute the common heritage of the different traditions of Buddhism (Thervada, Tibetan, and Eastern) that exist in the world today. From the narrative of the story of the Buddha, through discussions of aspects such as textual traditions, the framework of the Four Noble Truths, the interaction between the monastic and lay ways of life, the cosmology of karma and rebirth, and the path of the bodhisattva, this book provides a stimulating introduction to Buddhism as a religion and way of life.

What is "book of the month"?
One good way to use this site can be to study books together, and post any questions from those books that we may have. The idea is that the text should be one that will stimulate our question-asking faculties, which we then apply by asking questions about the content of book of the month on Buddhism.SE. In the beginning of every month, we start a thread here on meta to suggest and vote for a book. By the 15th, the top voted suggestion is selected. Everyone is free to participate.
Last month, the book selected for reading was "Women in Buddhism - Question & Answers".
Enjoy the reading!

There it is, sorry for the delay, I was on vacation